Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grzegorz Bębnik


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was withdrawn by nominator. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 23:26, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Grzegorz Bębnik

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Grzegorz Bębnik does not appear to pass WP:NAUTHOR. Additionally, the only source in this WP:BLP is a self-published source from the author's employer and the Wikipedia articles on the individual written in Afrikaans and Polish both appear to not be sourced whatsoever. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 21:02, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:07, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:07, 25 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. He has habilitation which passes Polish Wikipedia's equivalent og NACADEMIC; our is unclear on whether this is sufficient but I think it should be enough. His work has some visibility, ex. . Additionally he publishes newspaper articles on popular history in some notable Polish newspapers: (Polish Press Agency reported on an event/forum related to on of his books). He received a minor local award for popularizing history on 2013:  (it does not have en wiki page but does have a pl one: pl:Nagroda im. ks. Augustina Weltzla „Górnośląski Tacyt”). His books got some reviews: academic, , , popular history magazine: , newspaper: ... I think that's enough for NPROF on en wiki too. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  07:43, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  07:46, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  07:46, 26 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment. I found two book reviews, the second of which is for an edited volume. It's not enough yet to convince me of a pass of WP:AUTHOR but maybe there is more out there to be found. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:51, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * In light of the above, I'd be OK to withdraw this if you don't have an objection, . — Mikehawk10 (talk) 23:02, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Not really. If I had an objection I would have formulated some kind of delete opinion rather than just a comment. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:13, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep agree per Piotrus. VocalIndia (talk) 16:42, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.